Yup, I've done a bunch of driving in MA. People like to complain about Boston drivers who seem to think they own the road but I like that they don't use brakes when a maneuver will get them around an obstacle. As bad as the traffic is I'd rather drive in Boston than New York where they ride the brakes and sit on their horns.
I'm convinced that I93 from NH to Boston is the fastest road in the East, maybe the US. Average speeds are around 75 and it's impossible to camp in the left because no matter how fast you are going somebody will pass you. I once clocked a Brockton Police car at 90, in Reading/Woburn!
I took 95 to Florida this spring and cruised around 80 almost everywhere south of Richmond where the limit goes up to 75.
I did see a few traps but they didn't seem to be interested in any doing under 90.
Going back on I-81 thru the Shenandoah Valley and the Poconos was much the same with less truck traffic, very enjoyable drive until the weather got bad in PA.
Whenever I cross the state line from Indiana or Wisconsin into Illinois, the traffic speeds up 15-20 MPH over the speed limit. Have noticed it for many years. I think Chicago-area drivers are so often stuck in traffic that they blow past the speed limit whenever they can, and they know they won't get pulled over. I nominate Wisconsin drivers for most likely to pull out in front of another car or change lanes without looking first.
I'm always trying to cut speeders off, and block them in traffic. If I can arrange my schedule to leave and arrive on time, SO CAN YOU. Speeding is a waste of gas, a thumb in the eye of authority, increases likelihood you or someone else will get injured in a crash, and can be very costly if you are ticketed. Just don't do it....
When I notice an [non-permissible content removed] doing that, I tend to take it one step further and slow down... then block them off in traffic. For some reason, they get just as mad as speedsters when someone makes them have to slow down to below the speed limit.
Can't for the life of me understand why someone that wants people to slow down to the speed limit or slower would be upset when someone makes them slow down to the speed limit or slower.
Why aim for the glass? You're eliminating half the body by doing so.
Aim for the exact middle of the door and you're going to hit either their leg or lower torso. And the corresponding pain will most likely result in a crash that finishes the job.
There was a short science-fiction story that was all about that. It was called 'Why Johnny Can't Speed' by Alan Dean Foster.
---
He felt a surge of contempt, the usual reaction of the independent motorist to milk-footed driver's willfully abandoning their vehicular freedom for the crowding and crumpling of the mass-transit systems. What sort of person did it take, he wondered for the umpteenth time, to trade away his birthright for simple sardine-can safety? The country was definitely losing its backbone. He shook his head woefully as his practiced eye gauged the pattern shifting beneath him.
Mass Trans had required and still required a lot of money. One way in which the governments involved (meaning those of most industrial, developed nations) went about obtaining the necessary amounts was to cut back the expensive motorized forces needed to regulate the far-flung freeway systems. As the cutbacks increased it gradually became accepted custom among the remaining overworked patrols to allow drivers to settle their own disputes. This custom was finalized by the Supreme Court's handing down of the famous Briver vs. Matthews and the State of Texas decision of '79, in which it was ruled that all attempts to regulate interstate, nonstop highway systems were in direct violation of the First Amendment.
Any motorist who didn't feel up to potential arguments was provided a safe, quiet alternative means of transportation in the new Mass Trans systems, most of which ran down the center and sides of the familiar freeway routes, high above the frantic traffic. Benefits were immediate. Less pollution from even the fine turbine-steam-electric engines of the private autos, an end to many downtown parking problems in the big cities—and more. For the first time since their inception the freeways, even at rush hour, became negotiable at speeds close to those envisioned by their builders. And psychiatrists began to advise driving as excellent therapy for persons .afflicted with violent or even homicidal instincts. There were a few—un-American dirty commie pinko symps, no doubt—who decried the resultant proliferation of "argumentative" devices among highpowered autos. Some laughable folk even talked of an "arms" race among automakers.
I can drive the speed limit (legally) in ANY lane I want, in any state.
No, you can't. "Keep right except to pass". Signs posted prominently, and often.
RCW 46.61.100 (2): "Upon all roadways having two or more lanes for traffic moving in the same direction, all vehicles shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, except (a) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, (b) when traveling at a speed greater than the traffic flow, (c) when moving left to allow traffic to merge, or (d) when preparing for a left turn at an intersection, exit, or into a private road or driveway when such left turn is legally permitted."
And even better: RCW 46.61.100 (4): "It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other traffic."
Period. Left lane camping is against the law. Go to the police academy, or get out of the way.
In my last traffic violators school, there was a class of about 35 and only 2 raised their hand for speed limit violations for 10 or less miles per hour over the Speed Limit. Mind you, 30 of the 35 were there for "speeding." Almost everyone gets ticketed when you hit the magical 15 over mark. In southern CA, you are pretty darn immune if you keep it 10 over.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other traffic."
What it DOES NOT say, but which is what speeders THINK it means:
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other ILLEGALLY SPEEDING traffic."
If I were ever to get ticketed for such nonsense as "impeding speeders" my question for the judge would be, "Your Honor, which is worse - recklessly speeding and thumbing your nose at the laws of this state, or calmly driving at or near the speed limit and helping to see that others do not speed?"
Regardless, people can drive whatever speed they want.
Unless I get in front of them. :shades: :lemon: :shades: :lemon:
What it DOES NOT say, but which is what speeders THINK it means:
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other ILLEGALLY SPEEDING traffic."
The law pertaining to the left lane (and all other laws I have read for varying states) says NOTHING about speed limits. It simply states either keep right except to pass or keep out of the left lane if you're impeding traffic. You seem to think it's okay to remain in the left lane if you are going the speed limit. The law(s) do not say that. They say slower traffic keep right. If the law's intent was to allow a driver keeping the speed limit to remain in the left lane, it would say so directly. The law does however allow you to be in the left lane and travel the speed limit if you are passing slower traffic in the right lane.
I would argue that if you feel you shouldn't go faster than the limit to pass someone in the right lane that is going slower, even one mile per hour slower, that is your prerogative, however it is highly inconsiderate. However, you purport to be law abiding and always adhering to the laws of the road. So why do you insist on breaking a traffic law and "impede" faster traffic in the left lane, even if you are not passing in the left lane?
The law does not give others the right to speed, sure, but that does not give you the right to also break the law by remaining in the left lane. I cannot see you ALWAYS being able to purposely move over to the left lane to impede a speeder without incurring some sort of infraction. Sure, sometimes you'll be able to pass traffic in the right lane while keeping within the limit, but how often will you have to speed up past the limit to pass traffic (thus allowing you to be in the left lane legally), but then you will be speeding and breaking the same law you are trying to keep others from breaking. Or you will be in the left lane while not passing, thus still breaking a law which is just as bad as breaking a speed law. So no matter how you put it, you will most likely except in rare circumstances be breaking some sort of traffic law. Unless you are adhering to ALL traffic laws while committing your "speed impediment" maneuver, kindly remain out of the way of others who are doing no harm to you or others by deciding to go with the flow of traffic, even if it happens to be above the posted limit.
I see many signs in WA that say "keep right except to pass" and similar. Speed limit isn't relevant, lane discipline. Get the Blandry over into the right lane where it belongs and let motorists go by, or eventually someone will make you wish you had. In a devolved place like urban AZ, seems like a game of Russian roulette.
"Recklessly speeding" implies the limits are defendable and that exceeding them is a sure way to death. Reality doesn't support either implication.
Unfortunately your distinction between traffic and speeders is not made accordingly in the law. The law makes no distinction between traffic and speeders, as logically speeders are part of traffic.
Impede traffic, and you are breaking the law. Simple as that.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other traffic."
What it DOES NOT say, but which is what speeders THINK it means:
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other ILLEGALLY SPEEDING traffic."
So if a marked police car is doing 1 MPH over the limit and gets up behind you, you're NOT going to pull to the right because he's "illegally speeding"?
As others have already said, "impeding traffic" is just that, impeding traffic. Whether they're going 25 over or 10 under, if they're still going faster than you, and you're hogging the left lane, you're still impeding traffic, just as the law says. I'm not seeing any loopholes there.
If I were ever to get ticketed for such nonsense as "impeding speeders" my question for the judge would be, "Your Honor, which is worse - recklessly speeding and thumbing your nose at the laws of this state, or calmly driving at or near the speed limit and helping to see that others do not speed?"
And the response from the judge after asking your question? "Whether other traffic is "recklessly speeding" or not, it DOES NOT give you the right to break a law and impede traffic."
"Nonsense" or not, you're still breaking the law, and judges don't care for vigilante justice. Neither do cops.
The "impeding traffic" laws look more and more like "The Speeders Protection Laws" to me....
No, it's more like the "allowing traffic to flow smoothly, and NOT allowing nutjobs to practice vigilante justice, which causes traffic jams, heightens the risks of deadly collisions, and spurs on Road Rage" law.
Without taking sides on this fascinating debate, I'm gonna throw something out to y'all for consideration.
Here in Colorado, I-70 is the main gateway from Denver to the ski resorts. Most of it is two lanes, but there are places where it is 3 lanes.
Each winter, traffic is a mess on Friday and Sunday afternoons as the masses go to/from the ski areas.
The Colorado State Patrol (CSP) is going to implement a process of "pacing", where a marked patrol car will weave across all lanes of traffic at a reasonable speed (50-55 MPH, I think), so that all cars behind it will be doing the same speed. Studies have shown that the differential in speed from the left to the right lane is the primary cause of much of the traffic backups and accidents.
This will be done during peak traffic times and will be in effect along a 40 mile stretch of highway on both the east and west sides of the Continental Divide (Eisenhower and Johnson tunnels). Tests done in the past few months show a marked reduction in accidents and a better flow of traffic for all involved.
I am deliberately not taking a side on this issue. Discuss!
I just can't see a logical basis where "Slowing down the speeders !!!" can be or should be a violation of the law......
Simple answers again:
1) It wastes gas to slow down speeders. 2) It causes congestion and traffic jams. 3) It causes mayhem, havoc, and dangerous roadways which causes # 4 and #5 4) More accidents 5) More injuries and death.
Simple lane courtesy and discipline avoids all of this nonsense.
Speeders aren't the problem, left lane campers are the problem.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
1. Slowing down speeders SAVES, not WASTES, gas. 2. Like I said to a previous poster - neither God, nor you, nor I, have EVER seen a traffic jam at MAXIMUM posted speeds. It only happens with congestion - has nothing to do with left lane campers. 3. Driving slower should never mean any of that. 4. Accidents at slower speeds kill considerably fewer people than accidents at high speeds do. 5. See #4.
Wrong. The fundamental truth is you are slowing down speeders which means they have to BRAKE which means they are wasting forward momentum and therefore gas. Congestion and traffic also reduce MPG.
2). Lots of traffic jams are preventable, and have a lot to do with left lane campers. A jam at the Speed limit isn't very annoying, so most don't complain, but they happen all the time.
3) Causing faster traffic to merge right creates greater speed variability with the slow pokes in the slow right lane, and brings them closer together, raising accidents.
4) where's the data on that?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
1. Going 65, then braking once, and then going 55 for the next few miles costs less gas than driving 65 the entire time.
4. It's called PHYSICS. Objects (including humans) moving at faster speeds and coming to a stop suffer more force than moving at a slower speed and coming to that stop. Look up the video of the Ford Focus hitting a concrete wall at 120 MPH and compare that to the regular crash tests at slower speeds. See: http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/speed_limits.html
I remember actually witnessing a traffic jam in the making. I was heading to John Wayne (SNA) for a 0 dark thirty departure on the 405. Traffic was still somewhat light, but you could tell by the headlights in the opposite direction that some vehicles were lolligagging in the middle and left lanes and it wasn't that much longer that traffic was starting to back up behind them. Left lane bandits do cause traffic messes and so does Larsb if (and I emphasize the "if") he truly pulls into faster lanes to deliberately slow down traffic. My personal opinion is that if he truly does this consistently in a major metropolitan area he would have been in an accident by now.
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other ILLEGALLY SPEEDING traffic."
Please re-read post #827. Al explains it better than I can. Then mirror check, signal, head check, and move to the right. And then stay there, except to pass.
Sorry, Steve - had to defend the RCW's from being, shall we say, misinterpreted? Yeah, let's talk skiing or something (and the trick in Colorado will be just go early & get ahead of the rolling roadblocks. Us Ski Patrol folks are there early anyway! :P
I feel confident that there are a few law enforcement people reading this forum. Put me in the line of common sense when it comes to slower traffic keeping to the right on multi lane interstate highways. It amaze me when someone takes the attitude of deliberately driving in the left lane at or below the speed limit in an effort to keep everyone else from exceeding the stated speed limit. I am not not calling anyone out in this forum if he or she is guilty of this practice, but this seems like a form of road rage to me. If I am traveling at 70mph in the left lane and someone is approaching in my rear at a faster rate of speed, it is all to easy for me to move over into the right lane when it is safe to do so.
I really believe that there are prudent Law Enforcement Officers who do their best to make sure it is safe on our highways. In this same light, I am sure that 95 percent of Officers patrolling our highways are not apt to ticket someone who is driving with the current flow of traffic within 5 to 8 mph over the stated speed limit. I am also certain that if a patrol officer observing someone impeding traffic by driving in the left lane under the stated speed limit, he or she will warrant that officer's attention more readily than someone exceeding the speed limit by 5 to 8 mph.
Andres3, that is the best summary of cop on traffic patrol ever. but the fact is even with a 13-pack of donuts, any semi-experienced traffic cop knows *exactly* how fast you were going, no radar, no lidar, no squat-dar, while reading the perp photo journal. never mind all the BS. you were speeding while also being typically slower than me and actual big-dog drivers. so just pay your driving/speeding-ticket tax politely and get back on the road and cut back on the whining maybe 23% or 24%. happy motoring! NY thruway speeding ticket? just pay it and be happy.
here's the story part: i've amazingly never been bagged on the NYS thruway. concious driving entails knowing the exact speed limit everywhere, posted or not. the northern thruway section is where i usually drive, MA state line to buffalo, home of the only actual NY NFL football team. I drove on I-88 immediately after it opened ; it remains one of the best highway drives in USA. I got snagged for driving 83 on I88 back in the double-nickel days (was 1983/84 winter double-nickel?). NYS trooper wrote me up for 70 or whatever was 1mph below the increased-penalty ticket, as have 100% of the officers who have bagged me on the highway, usually for 83 mph. also he touched 2 tire surfaces to verify extended highspeed driving, as if the stink from cooking dexron transmission fluid via leaky throttle-valve didn't already verify what his radar told him. (he told me so politely & professionally.)
next week, story of CA traffic tickets. andres3, two words for you: TRAFFIC SCHOOL. you really need to enroll in traffic school with me as your teaching assistant and legal consultant. class is in santa-cruz, dude.
ps - parking tickets. different forum. Ithaca NY cops knocking on the door in February at midnight, calling me to come out to the street and look at the parking from their perspective as well as from fire marshal perspective. they stood there shaking their heads until me and roommates removed two of the 3 cars parked in the one spot. They did not ot comment on the the 2 motorcycles parked inside the front door. (Upstate NY winter, engineers, deeep snow.) we returned the 2nd car to the one spot later, but never tried the 3-in-1 parking after that.
pps - larsb thanks for reminding us of the hordes of intentionally impeding drivers such as yourself. don't think your tactics are somehow unique or brilliant. it's called "passive-aggressive!". get it looked into, man! 99% of thoughtless/self-righteous/blocker/hostile drivers around boston behave just like you describe. (btw, it is fun to intentionally block the zigzagging speeder isn't it?! but it's lots more fun to intentionally make a gap by politely adjusting the impeding-driver's position to enable all the speeders (including bigrigs) to get past the LLCs & MLCs! )
You ever seen a traffic jam at posted maximum speeds? No, and neither have I, and neither has God. They don't exist.
Then you obviously don't drive during rush-hour. A traffic jam is when cars become lined up and they cannot change lanes or exit to drive their own pace. Whether it's at 10 MPH in a construction zone, or at 60 MPH because of some left lane camper, it's still impeding traffic, and causing a traffic jam. I've lost count of how many times I've driven comfortably at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, no jams, no issues, only to be lined up with dozens of other drivers five miles later because some camper is parked in the left lane doing 65 MPH and NOT PASSING drivers on the right. In fact, right lane drivers are passing THEM.
Traffic jams at speed DO exist, and they're usually caused by left-lane campers that have simply forgotten the rule that says "keep right except to pass".
Unfortunately for the state of Law Enforcement in CA, I've witnessed speeders pulled over (including other than myself) but I have NEVER ever witnessed a LLC pulled over for impeding traffic.
If anything, they'll pull over the guy behind them for tailgating
They are just backwards in CA. THE CHP needs a good overhaul.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Yes, when traffic gets jammed up and slowed up, often, the right lane becomes the de facto fast lane moving along maybe 45-65 MPH while the left lane sits at 15-25 MPH.
Or if the left lane is 0-10 MPH, the right lane might speed along at 10-20 MPH.
This is to say nothing of the LLC who causes an accident by forcing faster traffic to merge right while some unaware slower driver from the right merges left, resulting in the chaos of congestion afterwards.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
any semi-experienced traffic cop knows *exactly* how fast you were going, no radar, no lidar, no squat-dar, while reading the perp photo journal. never mind all the BS
I'd agree with you if you take away the word "exact" and enter "more or less + or - 10 MPH" and then also ADD " at a range of under 250 feet.
Increasing the distance makes it impossible for any human to accurately estimate speed, especially when you get to 1,000' or more. At 1,000 feet, they can't even make out your car model/make, let alone your speed!
For a relative example, 1,000 feet is like two huge Jose Canseco home runs from the 90's put together.
I challenge any cop in San Diego (or near) reading this to go out to any large parking lot and we'll spend an hour seeing just how good you really are. We'll even put money on it, make it worth your while. I'll bet as much as 3X your overpaid hourly salary to make it worth your while for that hour I spend proving you don't have a clue at over 1,000'
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
next week, story of CA traffic tickets. andres3, two words for you: TRAFFIC SCHOOL. you really need to enroll in traffic school with me as your teaching assistant and legal consultant. class is in santa-cruz, dude.
Traffic school is great ONCE your already found guilty if you can get the judge to show mercy and let you do traffic school even though you "fought" your ticket. They try to make it seem like you lose your "privilege" of going to traffic school if you fight your ticket. In some cases, you do, in others, you don't. Only makes them look more corrupt for if the system is on the up and up they shouldn't fear challenges in court. Makes them look SCARED of the fighters in court to offer such bribery, payoffs, and blackmail depending on your viewpoint!
Better to fight your ticket, as by going to traffic school you are in danger the next 18 months (as you are ineligible for it again should something happen). Also, you have to pay the man and admit to the ticket in order to go to traffic school
I'd much rather fight the system and get off WITH NO PAYMENT and only my wasted time, the court's wasted time, and the cops wasted time remaining in the ruins of a "not guilty/dismissed" verdict!
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
former coworker of mine got cited for LLC on I-495 in MA. he also got cited for 80 mph, although trooper told him that 80 mph did not warrant a detention and that the sole reason he was detained/cited was his failure to move right. (LLC).
I've seen a MA trooper pull over a tailgator, after intentionally slowing to let the gator go past. Then the tailgator pulled over onto the *left* shoulder! What a maroon!
One reason I particularly years of CA driving was that speed traps are illegal there and the other strict aspects the police must follow for traffic enforcement/patrol: no unmarked cars, citations invalidated unless officer's vehicle is parked in the direction of travel, and painted in a very particular/obvious paint scheme.
Another great thing about CA driving was highway 17 over the santa cruz mountains, what a fun commute that was. It's one of the top ten scenic highways in USA!
maybe consider a speeding ticket as a tax or a fee and do the math per mile or per year of driving and see what it's worth to you. estimate the # of miles you drive inbetween tickets? if one drive 60k miles per year, a speeding ticket every couple years seems low! also in the states without draconian insurance surcharges, the speeding citations can be a great bargain per-mile or per-year.
Also, without speeding, there isn't enough time in the year to get 60k miles of commuting & other driving done. life really is too short!
you might be surprised at the prevalence of traffic cams on the east coast. they are everywhere. your state dept of transportation probably has a web site where you can monitor them yourself or at least see their locations on a map. it's possible to use the video calculate the speed of every car going by, and license-plate recognition to mail a speeding ticket to the owner of each speeding car on the highway. (how long before there's an iphone app for that?)
different states have different rules re traffic schools. i'm not aware of any traffic-schools available in the northeast but I remain available daily to discuss such education options on the side of the highway with state officials. (while a santa cruz county resident, i took Bud Friedmans comedy traffic school. taught by a comic, but with actually zero jokes the entire day. it was good !)
The Colorado State Patrol (CSP) is going to implement a process of "pacing", where a marked patrol car will weave across all lanes of traffic at a reasonable speed (50-55 MPH, I think), so that all cars behind it will be doing the same speed. Studies have shown that the differential in speed from the left to the right lane is the primary cause of much of the traffic backups and accidents.
Well, if this is below the legal speed limit, then I say the cop needs to be ticketed for impeding the flow of traffic, improper lane changes, and whatever other charges would apply if a civilian was caught doing that!
Of COURSE variation in speed is what causes accidents. If the cars were all going the same speed, then they wouldn't be running into each other, would they?! (other than people making lane changes without looking).
I'd imagine that a cop running blocker might actually be more likely to cause an accident, if traffic backs up to far behind. Whatever kind of slowdown that happens at the front of the pack (minor tap of the brakes or whatever) will only get amplified further back in the pack, possibly to the point that someone hits the brakes TOO hard, and gets rear-ended.
You can't be serious with this propaganda link? The INSURANCE institute? LOL. I'd sooner believe Al Qeada and the Taliban's "research" and studies before I'd believe a group of greedy slime balls that consists of the Auto Insurance Industry. Speaking of undeserving groups for the bailouts, AIG tops the list. Frankly, the Taliban are much more trustworthy, honorable, and truthful than anything coming out of the mouth or hand of someone that works in the insurance industry.
The only thing they care about is making new ways to increase premiums and profits. They will do anything to back up and support idiotic notions to increase those premiums charges and their bottom line. Having more citations issued by machines and cameras is a good way to do that. Makes sense they support camera enforcement.
Can I get some data from an unbiased and uncorrupted source?
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I especially love the comment from an idiotic democratic politician, who repents and regrets ever helping to establish the camera system in the first place, and notes that since the cameras were introduced in the city "He says that since 2006, crashes have increased at half the intersections in Illinois that have cameras, stayed the same at 25% and decreased at 25%.
Now being a math guy, I'll take and prefer a situation which leaves 75% of intersections with the same or LESS amount of accidents than now exists with the cameras installed.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The only reason red light cameras change people's behavior (and accident numbers) at ALL is the speeders try to stop on yellow lights when before the camera they normally have GONE through the light, and that causes them to be rear-ended.
You put a red light camera at an intersection of a town full of law-abiding citizens, and you will have NO change at all.
Red light cameras don't change my behavior (as a speed limit driver) one ioter.
One need not be speeding to run a yellow or red light. Your assumption cannot be true.
First of all, it is legal to enter the intersection as long as the light is still yellow.
Secondly, the fault of a rear-end collision is that of the tailgator/not paying attention/going too fast dare I say???? person from behind that does the colliding! Obviously, people shouldn't be slamming on their brakes to stop for a camera and yellow/red light, but that is the fault of the cameras, bad judgment, and yellow lights that are TOO SHORT in duration. Mainly though, the causal consideration is the cameras. Remove them, and accidents reduce.
Lengthening the yellow lights by 1 seconds does wonders, sometimes well over 90% of so-called "violations/violators" are eliminated from existance by doing that.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Red light cameras don't change my behavior (as a speed limit driver) one ioter
They'd change your behavior if you came upon one you hadn't before, where the yellow cycle was shortened dangerously, which means that, while in the past you would have been able to drive through safely on the yellow, suddenly you find yourself getting a picture taken of your rear. And then, next time you go through that light, if it changes, you might find yourself stopping suddenly to avoid a ticket, only to become a smear in the pavement by the tractor trailer behind you, who knows that due to the length of his truck, a red light camera won't catch his license plate, so he decided to run it...regardless of what your decision was.
Lengthening the yellow lights by 1 seconds does wonders, sometimes well over 90% of so-called "violations/violators" are eliminated from existance by doing that.
I know you and I will never agree on Chrysler products, but I gotta say, when it comes to other topics (left lane campers, red light camera, and so on) you and I have a lot in common!
Well, I defend your right in this free country to have the freedom to defend and purchase Chrysler products as you wish (and at your own peril and risk) :P
I know there is no Chrysler product in my future absent a full refund for the previous Dodge purchase.
However, speaking of lengthening yellow lights which improves safety tremendously (unfortunately additional safety minimizes violations which minimizes revenue for the corrupt gov't bodies that thought camera's were a good idea, so there is a conflict of motive).
Another thing to note for those who argue camera's improve safety:
1) the dangerous red light runners are not the one's who speed through .1 second late. Not even a second late is really all that dangerous, let alone a split second.
2) The real dangerous collisions are from people running a red light at full speed in MID-CYCLE (say 30 seconds after the light has gone red). That is where you get the injury prone T-Bones; not from the yellow light mis-timers.
3) Camera's do nothing to prevent or reduce those types of accidents.
4) Most red-light camera tickets are issued for right turns where allowed, which is never what the program was intended for, as red light right turners were never a safety concern and that situation rarely if ever leads to accidents.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Comments
I'm convinced that I93 from NH to Boston is the fastest road in the East, maybe the US. Average speeds are around 75 and it's impossible to camp in the left because no matter how fast you are going somebody will pass you.
I once clocked a Brockton Police car at 90, in Reading/Woburn!
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
I do recall that when I drove to Florida, 95 through South Carolina moved as well. 80-85 in a 65 zone was common with lane discipline.
I did see a few traps but they didn't seem to be interested in any doing under 90.
Going back on I-81 thru the Shenandoah Valley and the Poconos was much the same with less truck traffic, very enjoyable drive until the weather got bad in PA.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
When I notice an [non-permissible content removed] doing that, I tend to take it one step further and slow down... then block them off in traffic. For some reason, they get just as mad as speedsters when someone makes them have to slow down to below the speed limit.
Can't for the life of me understand why someone that wants people to slow down to the speed limit or slower would be upset when someone makes them slow down to the speed limit or slower.
Only when passing, if you are in the passing lane.
Aim for the exact middle of the door and you're going to hit either their leg or lower torso. And the corresponding pain will most likely result in a crash that finishes the job.
:P
---
He felt a surge of contempt, the usual reaction of the independent motorist to milk-footed driver's willfully abandoning their vehicular freedom for the crowding and crumpling of the mass-transit systems. What sort of person did it take, he wondered for the umpteenth time, to trade away his birthright for simple sardine-can safety? The country was definitely losing its backbone. He shook his head woefully as his practiced eye gauged the pattern shifting beneath him.
Mass Trans had required and still required a lot of money. One way in which the governments involved (meaning those of most industrial, developed nations) went about obtaining the necessary amounts was to cut back the expensive motorized forces needed to regulate the far-flung freeway systems. As the cutbacks increased it gradually became accepted custom among the remaining overworked patrols to allow drivers to settle their own disputes. This custom was finalized by the Supreme Court's handing down of the famous Briver vs. Matthews and the State of Texas decision of '79, in which it was ruled that all attempts to regulate interstate, nonstop highway systems were in direct violation of the First Amendment.
Any motorist who didn't feel up to potential arguments was provided a safe, quiet alternative means of transportation in the new Mass Trans systems, most of which ran down the center and sides of the familiar freeway routes, high above the frantic traffic. Benefits were immediate. Less pollution from even the fine turbine-steam-electric engines of the private autos, an end to many downtown parking problems in the big cities—and more. For the first time since their inception the freeways, even at rush hour, became negotiable at speeds close to those envisioned by their builders. And psychiatrists began to advise driving as excellent therapy for persons .afflicted with violent or even homicidal instincts. There were a few—un-American dirty commie pinko symps, no doubt—who decried the resultant proliferation of "argumentative" devices among highpowered autos. Some laughable folk even talked of an "arms" race among automakers.
No, you can't.
"Keep right except to pass". Signs posted prominently, and often.
RCW 46.61.100 (2):
"Upon all roadways having two or more lanes for traffic moving in the same direction, all vehicles shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, except (a) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, (b) when traveling at a speed greater than the traffic flow, (c) when moving left to allow traffic to merge, or (d) when preparing for a left turn at an intersection, exit, or into a private road or driveway when such left turn is legally permitted."
And even better:
RCW 46.61.100 (4):
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other traffic."
Period.
Left lane camping is against the law.
Go to the police academy, or get out of the way.
What the law says:
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other traffic."
What it DOES NOT say, but which is what speeders THINK it means:
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other ILLEGALLY SPEEDING traffic."
If I were ever to get ticketed for such nonsense as "impeding speeders" my question for the judge would be, "Your Honor, which is worse - recklessly speeding and thumbing your nose at the laws of this state, or calmly driving at or near the speed limit and helping to see that others do not speed?"
Regardless, people can drive whatever speed they want.
Unless I get in front of them. :shades: :lemon: :shades: :lemon:
What it DOES NOT say, but which is what speeders THINK it means:
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other ILLEGALLY SPEEDING traffic."
The law pertaining to the left lane (and all other laws I have read for varying states) says NOTHING about speed limits. It simply states either keep right except to pass or keep out of the left lane if you're impeding traffic. You seem to think it's okay to remain in the left lane if you are going the speed limit. The law(s) do not say that. They say slower traffic keep right. If the law's intent was to allow a driver keeping the speed limit to remain in the left lane, it would say so directly. The law does however allow you to be in the left lane and travel the speed limit if you are passing slower traffic in the right lane.
I would argue that if you feel you shouldn't go faster than the limit to pass someone in the right lane that is going slower, even one mile per hour slower, that is your prerogative, however it is highly inconsiderate. However, you purport to be law abiding and always adhering to the laws of the road. So why do you insist on breaking a traffic law and "impede" faster traffic in the left lane, even if you are not passing in the left lane?
The law does not give others the right to speed, sure, but that does not give you the right to also break the law by remaining in the left lane. I cannot see you ALWAYS being able to purposely move over to the left lane to impede a speeder without incurring some sort of infraction. Sure, sometimes you'll be able to pass traffic in the right lane while keeping within the limit, but how often will you have to speed up past the limit to pass traffic (thus allowing you to be in the left lane legally), but then you will be speeding and breaking the same law you are trying to keep others from breaking. Or you will be in the left lane while not passing, thus still breaking a law which is just as bad as breaking a speed law. So no matter how you put it, you will most likely except in rare circumstances be breaking some sort of traffic law. Unless you are adhering to ALL traffic laws while committing your "speed impediment" maneuver, kindly remain out of the way of others who are doing no harm to you or others by deciding to go with the flow of traffic, even if it happens to be above the posted limit.
"Recklessly speeding" implies the limits are defendable and that exceeding them is a sure way to death. Reality doesn't support either implication.
Impede traffic, and you are breaking the law. Simple as that.
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other traffic."
What it DOES NOT say, but which is what speeders THINK it means:
"It is a traffic infraction to drive continuously in the left lane of a multilane roadway when it impedes the flow of other ILLEGALLY SPEEDING traffic."
So if a marked police car is doing 1 MPH over the limit and gets up behind you, you're NOT going to pull to the right because he's "illegally speeding"?
As others have already said, "impeding traffic" is just that, impeding traffic. Whether they're going 25 over or 10 under, if they're still going faster than you, and you're hogging the left lane, you're still impeding traffic, just as the law says. I'm not seeing any loopholes there.
If I were ever to get ticketed for such nonsense as "impeding speeders" my question for the judge would be, "Your Honor, which is worse - recklessly speeding and thumbing your nose at the laws of this state, or calmly driving at or near the speed limit and helping to see that others do not speed?"
And the response from the judge after asking your question? "Whether other traffic is "recklessly speeding" or not, it DOES NOT give you the right to break a law and impede traffic."
"Nonsense" or not, you're still breaking the law, and judges don't care for vigilante justice. Neither do cops.
I just can't see a logical basis where "Slowing down the speeders !!!" can be or should be a violation of the law......
No, it's more like the "allowing traffic to flow smoothly, and NOT allowing nutjobs to practice vigilante justice, which causes traffic jams, heightens the risks of deadly collisions, and spurs on Road Rage" law.
Here in Colorado, I-70 is the main gateway from Denver to the ski resorts. Most of it is two lanes, but there are places where it is 3 lanes.
Each winter, traffic is a mess on Friday and Sunday afternoons as the masses go to/from the ski areas.
The Colorado State Patrol (CSP) is going to implement a process of "pacing", where a marked patrol car will weave across all lanes of traffic at a reasonable speed (50-55 MPH, I think), so that all cars behind it will be doing the same speed. Studies have shown that the differential in speed from the left to the right lane is the primary cause of much of the traffic backups and accidents.
This will be done during peak traffic times and will be in effect along a 40 mile stretch of highway on both the east and west sides of the Continental Divide (Eisenhower and Johnson tunnels). Tests done in the past few months show a marked reduction in accidents and a better flow of traffic for all involved.
I am deliberately not taking a side on this issue. Discuss!
Simple answers again:
1) It wastes gas to slow down speeders.
2) It causes congestion and traffic jams.
3) It causes mayhem, havoc, and dangerous roadways which causes # 4 and #5
4) More accidents
5) More injuries and death.
Simple lane courtesy and discipline avoids all of this nonsense.
Speeders aren't the problem, left lane campers are the problem.
1. Slowing down speeders SAVES, not WASTES, gas.
2. Like I said to a previous poster - neither God, nor you, nor I, have EVER seen a traffic jam at MAXIMUM posted speeds. It only happens with congestion - has nothing to do with left lane campers.
3. Driving slower should never mean any of that.
4. Accidents at slower speeds kill considerably fewer people than accidents at high speeds do.
5. See #4.
Wrong. The fundamental truth is you are slowing down speeders which means they have to BRAKE which means they are wasting forward momentum and therefore gas. Congestion and traffic also reduce MPG.
2). Lots of traffic jams are preventable, and have a lot to do with left lane campers. A jam at the Speed limit isn't very annoying, so most don't complain, but they happen all the time.
3) Causing faster traffic to merge right creates greater speed variability with the slow pokes in the slow right lane, and brings them closer together, raising accidents.
4) where's the data on that?
4. It's called PHYSICS. Objects (including humans) moving at faster speeds and coming to a stop suffer more force than moving at a slower speed and coming to that stop. Look up the video of the Ford Focus hitting a concrete wall at 120 MPH and compare that to the regular crash tests at slower speeds.
See:
http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/speed_limits.html
People are reluctant to pass cops, even if they are going slower than the posted speed limit.
So, is the intent to slow all three lanes below the limit? Couldn't they pace traffic at the speed limit? Still seems like it'll cause bottlenecks.
I'm so glad I can go chase powder on weekdays. Of course, I'm not exactly in the Rockies either.
Everyone, let's move on from talking about each other eh? When we do that, the conversation seems to take a turn south.
Thanks.
No, it does not say that. Look it up yourself:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.100
Please re-read post #827. Al explains it better than I can.
Then mirror check, signal, head check, and move to the right. And then stay there, except to pass.
Yeah, let's talk skiing or something
(and the trick in Colorado will be just go early & get ahead of the rolling roadblocks. Us Ski Patrol folks are there early anyway! :P
I really believe that there are prudent Law Enforcement Officers who do their best to make sure it is safe on our highways. In this same light, I am sure that 95 percent of Officers patrolling our highways are not apt to ticket someone who is driving with the current flow of traffic within 5 to 8 mph over the stated speed limit. I am also certain that if a patrol officer observing someone impeding traffic by driving in the left lane under the stated speed limit, he or she will warrant that officer's attention more readily than someone exceeding the speed limit by 5 to 8 mph.
but the fact is even with a 13-pack of donuts, any semi-experienced traffic cop knows *exactly* how fast you were going, no radar, no lidar, no squat-dar, while reading the perp photo journal. never mind all the BS. you were speeding while also being typically slower than me and actual big-dog drivers.
so just pay your driving/speeding-ticket tax politely and get back on the road and cut back on the whining maybe 23% or 24%. happy motoring!
NY thruway speeding ticket? just pay it and be happy.
here's the story part:
i've amazingly never been bagged on the NYS thruway. concious driving entails knowing the exact speed limit everywhere, posted or not. the northern thruway section is where i usually drive, MA state line to buffalo, home of the only actual NY NFL football team. I drove on I-88 immediately after it opened ; it remains one of the best highway drives in USA.
I got snagged for driving 83 on I88 back in the double-nickel days (was 1983/84 winter double-nickel?).
NYS trooper wrote me up for 70 or whatever was 1mph below the increased-penalty ticket, as have 100% of the officers who have bagged me on the highway, usually for 83 mph.
also he touched 2 tire surfaces to verify extended highspeed driving, as if the stink from cooking dexron transmission fluid via leaky throttle-valve didn't already verify what his radar told him. (he told me so politely & professionally.)
next week, story of CA traffic tickets. andres3, two words for you: TRAFFIC SCHOOL. you really need to enroll in traffic school with me as your teaching assistant and legal consultant. class is in santa-cruz, dude.
ps - parking tickets. different forum. Ithaca NY cops knocking on the door in February at midnight, calling me to come out to the street and look at the parking from their perspective as well as from fire marshal perspective. they stood there shaking their heads until me and roommates removed two of the 3 cars parked in the one spot. They did not ot comment on the the 2 motorcycles parked inside the front door. (Upstate NY winter, engineers, deeep snow.)
we returned the 2nd car to the one spot later, but never tried the 3-in-1 parking after that.
pps - larsb thanks for reminding us of the hordes of intentionally impeding drivers such as yourself. don't think your tactics are somehow unique or brilliant. it's called "passive-aggressive!". get it looked into, man! 99% of thoughtless/self-righteous/blocker/hostile drivers around boston behave just like you describe. (btw, it is fun to intentionally block the zigzagging speeder isn't it?! but it's lots more fun to intentionally make a gap by politely adjusting the impeding-driver's position to enable all the speeders (including bigrigs) to get past the LLCs & MLCs! )
Then you obviously don't drive during rush-hour. A traffic jam is when cars become lined up and they cannot change lanes or exit to drive their own pace. Whether it's at 10 MPH in a construction zone, or at 60 MPH because of some left lane camper, it's still impeding traffic, and causing a traffic jam. I've lost count of how many times I've driven comfortably at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, no jams, no issues, only to be lined up with dozens of other drivers five miles later because some camper is parked in the left lane doing 65 MPH and NOT PASSING drivers on the right. In fact, right lane drivers are passing THEM.
Traffic jams at speed DO exist, and they're usually caused by left-lane campers that have simply forgotten the rule that says "keep right except to pass".
If anything, they'll pull over the guy behind them for tailgating
They are just backwards in CA. THE CHP needs a good overhaul.
Or if the left lane is 0-10 MPH, the right lane might speed along at 10-20 MPH.
This is to say nothing of the LLC who causes an accident by forcing faster traffic to merge right while some unaware slower driver from the right merges left, resulting in the chaos of congestion afterwards.
I'd agree with you if you take away the word "exact" and enter "more or less + or - 10 MPH" and then also ADD " at a range of under 250 feet.
Increasing the distance makes it impossible for any human to accurately estimate speed, especially when you get to 1,000' or more. At 1,000 feet, they can't even make out your car model/make, let alone your speed!
For a relative example, 1,000 feet is like two huge Jose Canseco home runs from the 90's put together.
I challenge any cop in San Diego (or near) reading this to go out to any large parking lot and we'll spend an hour seeing just how good you really are. We'll even put money on it, make it worth your while. I'll bet as much as 3X your overpaid hourly salary to make it worth your while for that hour I spend proving you don't have a clue at over 1,000'
Traffic school is great ONCE your already found guilty if you can get the judge to show mercy and let you do traffic school even though you "fought" your ticket. They try to make it seem like you lose your "privilege" of going to traffic school if you fight your ticket. In some cases, you do, in others, you don't. Only makes them look more corrupt for if the system is on the up and up they shouldn't fear challenges in court. Makes them look SCARED of the fighters in court to offer such bribery, payoffs, and blackmail depending on your viewpoint!
Better to fight your ticket, as by going to traffic school you are in danger the next 18 months (as you are ineligible for it again should something happen). Also, you have to pay the man and admit to the ticket in order to go to traffic school
I'd much rather fight the system and get off WITH NO PAYMENT and only my wasted time, the court's wasted time, and the cops wasted time remaining in the ruins of a "not guilty/dismissed" verdict!
I've seen a MA trooper pull over a tailgator, after intentionally slowing to let the gator go past. Then the tailgator pulled over onto the *left* shoulder! What a maroon!
One reason I particularly years of CA driving was that speed traps are illegal there and the other strict aspects the police must follow for traffic enforcement/patrol: no unmarked cars, citations invalidated unless officer's vehicle is parked in the direction of travel, and painted in a very particular/obvious paint scheme.
Another great thing about CA driving was highway 17 over the santa cruz mountains, what a fun commute that was. It's one of the top ten scenic highways in USA!
Also, without speeding, there isn't enough time in the year to get 60k miles of commuting & other driving done. life really is too short!
you might be surprised at the prevalence of traffic cams on the east coast. they are everywhere. your state dept of transportation probably has a web site where you can monitor them yourself or at least see their locations on a map.
it's possible to use the video calculate the speed of every car going by, and license-plate recognition to mail a speeding ticket to the owner of each speeding car on the highway. (how long before there's an iphone app for that?)
different states have different rules re traffic schools.
i'm not aware of any traffic-schools available in the northeast but I remain available daily to discuss such education options on the side of the highway with state officials.
(while a santa cruz county resident, i took Bud Friedmans comedy traffic school. taught by a comic, but with actually zero jokes the entire day. it was good !)
Well, if this is below the legal speed limit, then I say the cop needs to be ticketed for impeding the flow of traffic, improper lane changes, and whatever other charges would apply if a civilian was caught doing that!
Of COURSE variation in speed is what causes accidents. If the cars were all going the same speed, then they wouldn't be running into each other, would they?! (other than people making lane changes without looking).
I'd imagine that a cop running blocker might actually be more likely to cause an accident, if traffic backs up to far behind. Whatever kind of slowdown that happens at the front of the pack (minor tap of the brakes or whatever) will only get amplified further back in the pack, possibly to the point that someone hits the brakes TOO hard, and gets rear-ended.
You can't be serious with this propaganda link? The INSURANCE institute? LOL. I'd sooner believe Al Qeada and the Taliban's "research" and studies before I'd believe a group of greedy slime balls that consists of the Auto Insurance Industry. Speaking of undeserving groups for the bailouts, AIG tops the list. Frankly, the Taliban are much more trustworthy, honorable, and truthful than anything coming out of the mouth or hand of someone that works in the insurance industry.
The only thing they care about is making new ways to increase premiums and profits. They will do anything to back up and support idiotic notions to increase those premiums charges and their bottom line. Having more citations issued by machines and cameras is a good way to do that. Makes sense they support camera enforcement.
Can I get some data from an unbiased and uncorrupted source?
1) http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-01-17-red-light-side_N.htm
2) http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-01-17-red-light_N.htm
I especially love the comment from an idiotic democratic politician, who repents and regrets ever helping to establish the camera system in the first place, and notes that since the cameras were introduced in the city "He says that since 2006, crashes have increased at half the intersections in Illinois that have cameras, stayed the same at 25% and decreased at 25%.
Now being a math guy, I'll take and prefer a situation which leaves 75% of intersections with the same or LESS amount of accidents than now exists with the cameras installed.
You put a red light camera at an intersection of a town full of law-abiding citizens, and you will have NO change at all.
Red light cameras don't change my behavior (as a speed limit driver) one ioter.
First of all, it is legal to enter the intersection as long as the light is still yellow.
Secondly, the fault of a rear-end collision is that of the tailgator/not paying attention/going too fast dare I say???? person from behind that does the colliding! Obviously, people shouldn't be slamming on their brakes to stop for a camera and yellow/red light, but that is the fault of the cameras, bad judgment, and yellow lights that are TOO SHORT in duration. Mainly though, the causal consideration is the cameras. Remove them, and accidents reduce.
Lengthening the yellow lights by 1 seconds does wonders, sometimes well over 90% of so-called "violations/violators" are eliminated from existance by doing that.
They'd change your behavior if you came upon one you hadn't before, where the yellow cycle was shortened dangerously, which means that, while in the past you would have been able to drive through safely on the yellow, suddenly you find yourself getting a picture taken of your rear. And then, next time you go through that light, if it changes, you might find yourself stopping suddenly to avoid a ticket, only to become a smear in the pavement by the tractor trailer behind you, who knows that due to the length of his truck, a red light camera won't catch his license plate, so he decided to run it...regardless of what your decision was.
I know you and I will never agree on Chrysler products, but I gotta say, when it comes to other topics (left lane campers, red light camera, and so on) you and I have a lot in common!
I know there is no Chrysler product in my future absent a full refund for the previous Dodge purchase.
However, speaking of lengthening yellow lights which improves safety tremendously (unfortunately additional safety minimizes violations which minimizes revenue for the corrupt gov't bodies that thought camera's were a good idea, so there is a conflict of motive).
Another thing to note for those who argue camera's improve safety:
1) the dangerous red light runners are not the one's who speed through .1 second late. Not even a second late is really all that dangerous, let alone a split second.
2) The real dangerous collisions are from people running a red light at full speed in MID-CYCLE (say 30 seconds after the light has gone red). That is where you get the injury prone T-Bones; not from the yellow light mis-timers.
3) Camera's do nothing to prevent or reduce those types of accidents.
4) Most red-light camera tickets are issued for right turns where allowed, which is never what the program was intended for, as red light right turners were never a safety concern and that situation rarely if ever leads to accidents.